History
  • No items yet
midpage
Mitchell v. Richmond
164 Pa. 566
Pa.
1894
Check Treatment
Per Curiam,

There is nothing in the third and fourth specifications of error that would justify a reversal of the judgment. The first and second specifications relate to the question of law reserved. That question has been so fully considered and satisfactorily disposed of by the learned president of the court below, in his opinion sent up with the record, that little, if anything, can be added thereto; and we- therefore affirm the judgment on Iris opinion.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Mitchell v. Richmond
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Nov 5, 1894
Citation: 164 Pa. 566
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 43
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.